Armour v. City Of Indianapolis

132 S.Ct. 2073 (2012)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

An Indiana statute, the “Barrett Law,” authorized D to impose upon benefited lot owners the cost of sewer improvement projects. The Law also permitted those lot owners to pay either immediately in the form of a lump sum or over time in installments. D adopted a new assessment and payment method, the “STEP” plan, and it forgave any Barrett Law installments that lot owners had not yet paid. Ps, a group of lot owners who had already paid their entire Barrett Law assessment in a lump sum, believe that D should have provided them with equivalent refunds. In this instance, each homeowner could pay the entire assessment--$9,278 per property--in a lump sum or installments, which would include interest at a 3.5% annual rate. Under an installment plan, payments would amount to $77.27 per month for 10 years; $38.66 per month for 20 years; or $25.77 per month for 30 years. Thirty-eight homeowners chose to pay up front; 47 chose the 10-year plan; 27 chose the 20-year plan; and 68 chose the 30-year plan. The very next year, D abandoned the Barrett Law. D's new STEP method of financing would charge each connecting lot owner a flat $2,500 fee and make up the difference by floating bonds eventually paid for by all lot owners citywide. As part of the transition, D forgave all assessment amounts . . . established pursuant to the Barrett Law Funding. The upshot was that those who still owed Barrett Law assessments would not have to make further payments, but those who had already paid their assessments would not receive refunds. Those who had elected to pay the assessment in installments, and had paid a total of $ 309.27, $463.90, or $927.80, would be under no obligation to make further payments. They got a phenomenal deal while those who paid the full amount got royally screwed. Ps asked for a refund. D denied the request. Ps sued under Equal Protection. The Indiana Supreme Court agreed with D. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.